Sunday, 28 September 2008

Winning is more important than Economic Prosperity: US Debate comments

Afer reading comments in News that can are offered by Google NewsSearchand the comments on TV of US voters who watched the debates, myconclusion is that the US citizens are more concerned about winningthanabout their economic prosperity.

The prominent message given by McCain that the "burst" led to thewinning in Iraq but this is false. It was the support given by Iraqisthat led to the reduction in sectarian violences and US deaths.

Couldn't it be due to the threats by Democrats to give a time tableforwithdrawal, which made the Iraqi government more earnest in solvingtheir security problems rather than amassing their personal wealth?

I'm surprised that Obama didn't elaborate on this but it could be duetothe sentiments of US citizens who believe that Iraqis are imbecileswhoare incapable of looking after themselves, typical of racist attitudesthat I observe prominently in the citizens of USA. (racist here is thetrue meaning: superiority derogatory, not racial discrimination)

Obama in the debate mentioned briefly about the need of Iraq toshoulderthe burden of security for themselves but somehow commentators missedonthis issue. Obama didn't help by not emphasising forcefully on thisissue. But many European commentators are already aware of thistendencyof Obama in trying to get allies to shoulder more of the burden ofsecurity for the world.

McCain's main message is the USA is winning in Iraq, and Obama had notsupported the move that led to the win, which is a blatant lie. In theend the bill was passed but timetable for withdrawal is set at a laterdate. This tentative withdrawal date which led the US commanders tochange their tactics in trying to get help from the Iraqis and theIraqis were more desperate in solving their own problems.

The US citizens' tendency to support winning at all cost despitesuffering from economic disaster as a result of this win is clearlyshown by the result of this debate. Obama dare not even touch on thistopic despite the obvious fact that losing in Cambodia and Vietnam,never led to any security loss to USA but led to economic prosperityforUSA which contributed greatly to ending the era of the cold war.

McCain's disregard for the well being of the citizens of the occupiednations is also well respected by the US citizens. As pointed out byObama, supporting dictatorship regimes in Pakistan had not brought anyreward to USA in terms of increased security. The problems with IraqandAfghanistan is that they are corrupt and inefficient. They were chosennot because of their patriotism to their nations but by theirunconditional support for USA interests, above the interest of theircitizens. Taliban will never take root if Hamid's government isrespected by Afghans. Similarly for Iraq.

USA, no doubt supported by its citizens, mocked Iran for being a falsedemocracy, despite the fact that no citizen is denied the right tovote, unlike in Afghanistan and Iraq. And yet dare to proclaim thatAfghanistan and Iraq are true democracies, while Iran is not.

Another failed US policy that is also supported by its citizens, istheacceptance that talking to terrorists is deemed as giving credibilitytothe terrorists. It does not occur to even Obama and US journalists,thatthis is mocking Jesus, the founder of Christianity who routinelytalkedto criminals, prostitutes and even the Romans, his enemies.

Even if Obama were to win, it is more due to the concern for theeconomy. Most of the citizens of USA do not believe in just, freedomanddemocracy for people other than US citizens and Jews. Obama may be thevoice of reason, talking to people, even terrorists, concentrate onthereal security of USA instead of just winning, which includes givingtruejustice and freedom as well as mutual respect for other nations, buthemay have a hard time with the citizens of the USA. Obama should startwith the journalists who control the US media.